> When something reaches "critical mass" which I think YT has, it > becomes an entity of it's own, takes on a life of it's own. The > sheer amount of Main Stream Media coverage that YT gets is staggering > when compaired to other forms of online media. When I read about > blip, or bloggers or vloggers it is usually in "tech" magizines, like > PC World, CNet, etc, MOST of the arricles that I see about YT come > from the MSM, THAT is what "regular" people are reading and > watching. let's face it if you are on this group or one similar you > are NOT a "regular" person, (and I don't mean that in a bad way) but > for the average person, I really think YT is online video.
Again, yes and no. The MSM talks about MySpace endlessly, too. None of the most-read blogs on the Web are from MySpace. I think what I'm suggesting to you is that there are very different kinds of attention out there to get, and one does not translate to the other. Despite the proliferation of various blog-based online communities, the most popular blogs aren't in those communities, and they only get more popular. In fact, those communities are the echo chambers of the blogs standing separate. > Now that doesn't mean it is the only source or the only way to go, > but it is a force and a very powerful one. Right, but to suggest it is the end-all is, I believe, simplifying things way too much. > Look at it this way Microsoft is not the best operating system out > there, most people know that but when most people think of computers > they think of PC's and mircosoft, not Apple and while Apple is great > and has a strong following, it by far is eclipsed by MS.....because > that is what people know, they made it easy, YT has made it easy and > to most ease of use will always win the day. I develop operating systems for a living, and I share the opinion of a lot of people that they all pretty much suck equally in slightly different ways. I know that's not your point, but I just wanted to drop that in there. The analogy you're offering here is really an apples-to-oranges comparison. Windows enjoys the position it does because of monopolistic behavior that has had the longstanding effect of destroying customer choice. That's something you can see as good or bad, and that's not my point. My point is that you cannot compare the oligopolistic market of operating systems vendors to the monopolistically competetive world of online video. They have very different market dynamics. Basically, YouTube is a distribution network. It's a store, but it's free to consumers. So, your argument's analogy might be better phrased this way: Most people think of Wal*Mart and Target as the general focus of retail and they do almost all of their retail there. To them, Wal*Mart and Target are retail. So, if you're making a product for retail sale, the only way you're going to reach people is if you put all of your focus on promoting with respect to Wal*Mart and Target. I'm saying that's not so. They're a distribution and promotion channel, and they're VERY strong, and thus you should use them to your benefit, but to suggest it's time to pack it in and move to YouTube makes as much sense as selling a quality product only to Wal*Mart and Target and to only promote yourself via their advertising partnerships. Sure, you'll reach the people who are there, but you intentionally have capped your reach. > but that is just my opinion ;) And this is just mine. I wish my graduate studies were in economics so I could have the funding and time to generate real numbers to back up my point. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
